Post on 12-Aug-2020
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project
Baseline Assessments and Training and Professional Support
(Pilot Phase for 2 Districts)
Baseline Assessment Report
Wan Chai District
2016
Submitted by
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 1
Acknowledgement
Initiated and funded by The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Executive Summary
2 Introduction
21 Project Background
22 District Characteristics
23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District
3 Methodology
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
312 Measures
313 Data Analysis
32 Focus Group Study
4 Results
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
413 Sense of Community
414 Age Group Comparison
415 Sub-district community Comparison
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
422 Physical Environment
423 Social and Cultural Environment
424 Communication Community and Health Services
5 Conclusions
References
Appendices
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 3
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project aims to move Hong Kong towards an age-
friendly city This report describes the baseline assessment work done in the Wan Chai
District as part of the project The objective of the baseline assessment was to
understand the needs of the Wan Chai District in preparing the district to become age
friendly The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey)
study and a qualitative (focus group) study A total of 502 participants were included in
the questionnaire survey from five sub-district communities of Causeway Bay Wan
Chai Happy Valley Canal Road and Tai Hang Five focus groups were conducted
The typical participant of the questionnaire survey was a married woman aged
over 65 years who has resided in the district for 30 years living alone or with spouse
in a private owned apartment using elderly centres with fair perceived health retired
with a monthly income of less than HK$6000 but still felt financially sufficient The
age of the building is usually over 30 years with elevator although residents would
still need to take the stairs to go out Majority of the participants expected themselves
to age in place in the coming 5 years however should their health deteriorate the
percentage with such expectation dropped considerably The participants perceived the
district to be age-friendly in general particularly in terms of social participation but
least in terms of housing The sense of community is strong particularly in terms of
sense of membership The older the participant the stronger the sense of community
and perceived age-friendliness The five sub-district communities differed in their
profile of perceived age-friendliness with similar overall sense of community
Focus group participants expressed a sense of pride and belonging of living in the
district They also identified areas for further improvement They drew attention to (1)
physical environment issues hygiene and crowdedness of the open public space
pavement obstruction and the challenges in and need for renovation and maintenance
of residential buildings (2) social and cultural environmental issues vanishing of small
shops that suits the need of older persons and (3) communication and services issues
the general availability of healthcare services albeit long waiting time
Results from this baseline assessment suggested existing groundwork with a
reasonably good sense of community and perceived age-friendliness in the district
Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly should build on the existing
infrastructure and network and make use of the diversity within the district Specific
recommendations were provided for each of the eight domains in the World Health
Organizationrsquos Age-friendly City framework
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 4
2 INTRODUCTION
21 Project Background
The rapid population ageing in Hong Kong means rapidly increasing needs of the older
population The population aged 65 years or above is projected to increase from the
current 14 of the total population to 25 or every 1 in 4 people by 2029 and to 32
or every 1 in 3 people by 20411 This presents a great challenge to the society in
multiple ways including a shrinking labour force with a working age to elderly
population ratio of 181 by 2041 and increasing burden and cost for public services
Building an age-friendly city will help meet the needs of older people enabling them
to live an active independent and good-quality life An age-friendly city would also
facilitate the development of Hong Kong as a better society
The Sau Po Centre on Ageing of The University of Hong Kong (HKU) received a
donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the Central and Western District and the Wan
Chai District In both districts the study is implemented in two phases from September
2015 to February 2016 (Phase 1) and phase 2 is 3 years since March 2016 Phase 1 of
the project consists of three parts The first part is a baseline assessment of district age-
friendliness using a questionnaire interview design The second part is baseline
assessment of district friendliness using a focus group design with district residents and
key stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of their views on age-friendliness in
their communities A report of district-based recommendations and implementation
proposals is generated based on these findings The third part is to organize an ldquoAge-
friendly City Ambassador Programmerdquo in the districts to train ambassadors in
becoming familiar with the knowledge and methods in building an age-friendly
community Second phase of the project consists of collaboration with key district
stakeholders and provision of professional support from the HKU team to develop
implement and evaluate district-based age-friendly city projects for enhancing district
age-friendliness
This report presents baseline assessment findings from Phase 1 The objective of
the baseline assessment was to understand the needs of the Central amp Western District
and the Wan Chai District in preparing to become age friendly
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5
22 District Characteristics
Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within
the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high
volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as
Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and
governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood
have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the
2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency
Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)
Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)
Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)
According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai
District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged
65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population
This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population
Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly
population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140
Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the
total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong
Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working
population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household
was HK$45200
Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District
Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100
Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995
Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000
Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500
Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000
The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent
housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district
are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized
home ownership housing is available in the district
Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has
a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4
private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6
23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District
In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern
for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and
governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-
friendliness of the district3
Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-
wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of
Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of
HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee
of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office
of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan
Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated
as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013
trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a
guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance
of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-
friendly city
Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015
年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5
was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for
the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City
Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly
ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the
concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express
their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community
services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly
community
Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader
or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in
age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai
District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly
Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the
Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7
3 METHODOLOGY
The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a
qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand
the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among
residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group
study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness
of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined
by the World Health Organization (WHO)
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai
District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or
individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study
Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities
(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and
characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the
district
Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District
Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas
Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park
Tin Hau
Causeway Bay
Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy
Oi Kwan
Southorn
Tai Fat Hau
Stubbs Road
Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout
Broadwood
Happy Valley
Canal Road (CR) Canal Road
Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang
Lai Tak Tsuen
The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources
including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and
advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8
312 Measures
The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-
administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the
following areas (Appendix 2)
(i) Sociodemographic Information
These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type
employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured
using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6
(ii) Community Care
These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools
and ageing-in-place expectations
(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness
Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed
based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and
Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along
eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing
social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and
employment communication and information and community support and health
services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains
(iv) Sense of Community
Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence
and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of
Community Scale78
313 Data Analysis
Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to
identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness
and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test
the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups
and sub-district communities using linear regression method
32 Focus Group
This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the
WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we
have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council
of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each
focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute
break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in
community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9
4 RESULTS
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental
housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong
Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay
(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR
60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table
41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above
and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults
aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic
helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their
spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among
them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older
persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund
for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having
a monthly personal income below HK$6000
Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities
Sub-district communities N
Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153
Victoria Park 3 06
Tin Hau 20 40
Causeway Bay 54 108
Wan Chai (WC) 194 386
Hennessy 66 131
Oi Kwan 53 106
Southorn 29 58
Tai Fat Hau 44 88
Stubbs Road 2 04
Happy Valley (HV) 45 90
Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06
Broadwood 8 16
Happy Valley 34 68
Canal Road (CR) 30 60
Tai Hang (TH) 156 311
Tai Hang 33 66
Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245
Total 502 1000
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 1
Acknowledgement
Initiated and funded by The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Executive Summary
2 Introduction
21 Project Background
22 District Characteristics
23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District
3 Methodology
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
312 Measures
313 Data Analysis
32 Focus Group Study
4 Results
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
413 Sense of Community
414 Age Group Comparison
415 Sub-district community Comparison
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
422 Physical Environment
423 Social and Cultural Environment
424 Communication Community and Health Services
5 Conclusions
References
Appendices
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 3
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project aims to move Hong Kong towards an age-
friendly city This report describes the baseline assessment work done in the Wan Chai
District as part of the project The objective of the baseline assessment was to
understand the needs of the Wan Chai District in preparing the district to become age
friendly The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey)
study and a qualitative (focus group) study A total of 502 participants were included in
the questionnaire survey from five sub-district communities of Causeway Bay Wan
Chai Happy Valley Canal Road and Tai Hang Five focus groups were conducted
The typical participant of the questionnaire survey was a married woman aged
over 65 years who has resided in the district for 30 years living alone or with spouse
in a private owned apartment using elderly centres with fair perceived health retired
with a monthly income of less than HK$6000 but still felt financially sufficient The
age of the building is usually over 30 years with elevator although residents would
still need to take the stairs to go out Majority of the participants expected themselves
to age in place in the coming 5 years however should their health deteriorate the
percentage with such expectation dropped considerably The participants perceived the
district to be age-friendly in general particularly in terms of social participation but
least in terms of housing The sense of community is strong particularly in terms of
sense of membership The older the participant the stronger the sense of community
and perceived age-friendliness The five sub-district communities differed in their
profile of perceived age-friendliness with similar overall sense of community
Focus group participants expressed a sense of pride and belonging of living in the
district They also identified areas for further improvement They drew attention to (1)
physical environment issues hygiene and crowdedness of the open public space
pavement obstruction and the challenges in and need for renovation and maintenance
of residential buildings (2) social and cultural environmental issues vanishing of small
shops that suits the need of older persons and (3) communication and services issues
the general availability of healthcare services albeit long waiting time
Results from this baseline assessment suggested existing groundwork with a
reasonably good sense of community and perceived age-friendliness in the district
Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly should build on the existing
infrastructure and network and make use of the diversity within the district Specific
recommendations were provided for each of the eight domains in the World Health
Organizationrsquos Age-friendly City framework
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 4
2 INTRODUCTION
21 Project Background
The rapid population ageing in Hong Kong means rapidly increasing needs of the older
population The population aged 65 years or above is projected to increase from the
current 14 of the total population to 25 or every 1 in 4 people by 2029 and to 32
or every 1 in 3 people by 20411 This presents a great challenge to the society in
multiple ways including a shrinking labour force with a working age to elderly
population ratio of 181 by 2041 and increasing burden and cost for public services
Building an age-friendly city will help meet the needs of older people enabling them
to live an active independent and good-quality life An age-friendly city would also
facilitate the development of Hong Kong as a better society
The Sau Po Centre on Ageing of The University of Hong Kong (HKU) received a
donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the Central and Western District and the Wan
Chai District In both districts the study is implemented in two phases from September
2015 to February 2016 (Phase 1) and phase 2 is 3 years since March 2016 Phase 1 of
the project consists of three parts The first part is a baseline assessment of district age-
friendliness using a questionnaire interview design The second part is baseline
assessment of district friendliness using a focus group design with district residents and
key stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of their views on age-friendliness in
their communities A report of district-based recommendations and implementation
proposals is generated based on these findings The third part is to organize an ldquoAge-
friendly City Ambassador Programmerdquo in the districts to train ambassadors in
becoming familiar with the knowledge and methods in building an age-friendly
community Second phase of the project consists of collaboration with key district
stakeholders and provision of professional support from the HKU team to develop
implement and evaluate district-based age-friendly city projects for enhancing district
age-friendliness
This report presents baseline assessment findings from Phase 1 The objective of
the baseline assessment was to understand the needs of the Central amp Western District
and the Wan Chai District in preparing to become age friendly
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5
22 District Characteristics
Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within
the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high
volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as
Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and
governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood
have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the
2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency
Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)
Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)
Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)
According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai
District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged
65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population
This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population
Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly
population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140
Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the
total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong
Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working
population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household
was HK$45200
Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District
Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100
Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995
Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000
Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500
Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000
The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent
housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district
are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized
home ownership housing is available in the district
Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has
a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4
private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6
23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District
In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern
for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and
governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-
friendliness of the district3
Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-
wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of
Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of
HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee
of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office
of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan
Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated
as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013
trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a
guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance
of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-
friendly city
Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015
年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5
was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for
the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City
Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly
ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the
concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express
their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community
services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly
community
Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader
or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in
age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai
District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly
Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the
Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7
3 METHODOLOGY
The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a
qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand
the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among
residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group
study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness
of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined
by the World Health Organization (WHO)
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai
District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or
individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study
Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities
(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and
characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the
district
Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District
Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas
Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park
Tin Hau
Causeway Bay
Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy
Oi Kwan
Southorn
Tai Fat Hau
Stubbs Road
Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout
Broadwood
Happy Valley
Canal Road (CR) Canal Road
Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang
Lai Tak Tsuen
The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources
including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and
advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8
312 Measures
The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-
administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the
following areas (Appendix 2)
(i) Sociodemographic Information
These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type
employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured
using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6
(ii) Community Care
These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools
and ageing-in-place expectations
(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness
Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed
based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and
Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along
eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing
social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and
employment communication and information and community support and health
services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains
(iv) Sense of Community
Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence
and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of
Community Scale78
313 Data Analysis
Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to
identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness
and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test
the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups
and sub-district communities using linear regression method
32 Focus Group
This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the
WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we
have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council
of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each
focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute
break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in
community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9
4 RESULTS
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental
housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong
Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay
(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR
60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table
41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above
and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults
aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic
helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their
spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among
them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older
persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund
for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having
a monthly personal income below HK$6000
Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities
Sub-district communities N
Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153
Victoria Park 3 06
Tin Hau 20 40
Causeway Bay 54 108
Wan Chai (WC) 194 386
Hennessy 66 131
Oi Kwan 53 106
Southorn 29 58
Tai Fat Hau 44 88
Stubbs Road 2 04
Happy Valley (HV) 45 90
Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06
Broadwood 8 16
Happy Valley 34 68
Canal Road (CR) 30 60
Tai Hang (TH) 156 311
Tai Hang 33 66
Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245
Total 502 1000
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Executive Summary
2 Introduction
21 Project Background
22 District Characteristics
23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District
3 Methodology
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
312 Measures
313 Data Analysis
32 Focus Group Study
4 Results
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
413 Sense of Community
414 Age Group Comparison
415 Sub-district community Comparison
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
422 Physical Environment
423 Social and Cultural Environment
424 Communication Community and Health Services
5 Conclusions
References
Appendices
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 3
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project aims to move Hong Kong towards an age-
friendly city This report describes the baseline assessment work done in the Wan Chai
District as part of the project The objective of the baseline assessment was to
understand the needs of the Wan Chai District in preparing the district to become age
friendly The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey)
study and a qualitative (focus group) study A total of 502 participants were included in
the questionnaire survey from five sub-district communities of Causeway Bay Wan
Chai Happy Valley Canal Road and Tai Hang Five focus groups were conducted
The typical participant of the questionnaire survey was a married woman aged
over 65 years who has resided in the district for 30 years living alone or with spouse
in a private owned apartment using elderly centres with fair perceived health retired
with a monthly income of less than HK$6000 but still felt financially sufficient The
age of the building is usually over 30 years with elevator although residents would
still need to take the stairs to go out Majority of the participants expected themselves
to age in place in the coming 5 years however should their health deteriorate the
percentage with such expectation dropped considerably The participants perceived the
district to be age-friendly in general particularly in terms of social participation but
least in terms of housing The sense of community is strong particularly in terms of
sense of membership The older the participant the stronger the sense of community
and perceived age-friendliness The five sub-district communities differed in their
profile of perceived age-friendliness with similar overall sense of community
Focus group participants expressed a sense of pride and belonging of living in the
district They also identified areas for further improvement They drew attention to (1)
physical environment issues hygiene and crowdedness of the open public space
pavement obstruction and the challenges in and need for renovation and maintenance
of residential buildings (2) social and cultural environmental issues vanishing of small
shops that suits the need of older persons and (3) communication and services issues
the general availability of healthcare services albeit long waiting time
Results from this baseline assessment suggested existing groundwork with a
reasonably good sense of community and perceived age-friendliness in the district
Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly should build on the existing
infrastructure and network and make use of the diversity within the district Specific
recommendations were provided for each of the eight domains in the World Health
Organizationrsquos Age-friendly City framework
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 4
2 INTRODUCTION
21 Project Background
The rapid population ageing in Hong Kong means rapidly increasing needs of the older
population The population aged 65 years or above is projected to increase from the
current 14 of the total population to 25 or every 1 in 4 people by 2029 and to 32
or every 1 in 3 people by 20411 This presents a great challenge to the society in
multiple ways including a shrinking labour force with a working age to elderly
population ratio of 181 by 2041 and increasing burden and cost for public services
Building an age-friendly city will help meet the needs of older people enabling them
to live an active independent and good-quality life An age-friendly city would also
facilitate the development of Hong Kong as a better society
The Sau Po Centre on Ageing of The University of Hong Kong (HKU) received a
donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the Central and Western District and the Wan
Chai District In both districts the study is implemented in two phases from September
2015 to February 2016 (Phase 1) and phase 2 is 3 years since March 2016 Phase 1 of
the project consists of three parts The first part is a baseline assessment of district age-
friendliness using a questionnaire interview design The second part is baseline
assessment of district friendliness using a focus group design with district residents and
key stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of their views on age-friendliness in
their communities A report of district-based recommendations and implementation
proposals is generated based on these findings The third part is to organize an ldquoAge-
friendly City Ambassador Programmerdquo in the districts to train ambassadors in
becoming familiar with the knowledge and methods in building an age-friendly
community Second phase of the project consists of collaboration with key district
stakeholders and provision of professional support from the HKU team to develop
implement and evaluate district-based age-friendly city projects for enhancing district
age-friendliness
This report presents baseline assessment findings from Phase 1 The objective of
the baseline assessment was to understand the needs of the Central amp Western District
and the Wan Chai District in preparing to become age friendly
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5
22 District Characteristics
Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within
the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high
volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as
Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and
governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood
have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the
2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency
Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)
Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)
Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)
According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai
District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged
65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population
This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population
Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly
population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140
Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the
total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong
Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working
population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household
was HK$45200
Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District
Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100
Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995
Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000
Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500
Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000
The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent
housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district
are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized
home ownership housing is available in the district
Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has
a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4
private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6
23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District
In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern
for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and
governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-
friendliness of the district3
Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-
wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of
Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of
HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee
of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office
of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan
Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated
as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013
trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a
guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance
of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-
friendly city
Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015
年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5
was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for
the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City
Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly
ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the
concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express
their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community
services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly
community
Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader
or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in
age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai
District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly
Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the
Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7
3 METHODOLOGY
The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a
qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand
the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among
residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group
study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness
of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined
by the World Health Organization (WHO)
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai
District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or
individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study
Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities
(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and
characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the
district
Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District
Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas
Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park
Tin Hau
Causeway Bay
Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy
Oi Kwan
Southorn
Tai Fat Hau
Stubbs Road
Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout
Broadwood
Happy Valley
Canal Road (CR) Canal Road
Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang
Lai Tak Tsuen
The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources
including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and
advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8
312 Measures
The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-
administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the
following areas (Appendix 2)
(i) Sociodemographic Information
These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type
employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured
using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6
(ii) Community Care
These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools
and ageing-in-place expectations
(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness
Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed
based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and
Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along
eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing
social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and
employment communication and information and community support and health
services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains
(iv) Sense of Community
Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence
and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of
Community Scale78
313 Data Analysis
Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to
identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness
and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test
the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups
and sub-district communities using linear regression method
32 Focus Group
This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the
WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we
have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council
of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each
focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute
break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in
community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9
4 RESULTS
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental
housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong
Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay
(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR
60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table
41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above
and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults
aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic
helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their
spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among
them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older
persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund
for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having
a monthly personal income below HK$6000
Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities
Sub-district communities N
Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153
Victoria Park 3 06
Tin Hau 20 40
Causeway Bay 54 108
Wan Chai (WC) 194 386
Hennessy 66 131
Oi Kwan 53 106
Southorn 29 58
Tai Fat Hau 44 88
Stubbs Road 2 04
Happy Valley (HV) 45 90
Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06
Broadwood 8 16
Happy Valley 34 68
Canal Road (CR) 30 60
Tai Hang (TH) 156 311
Tai Hang 33 66
Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245
Total 502 1000
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 3
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project aims to move Hong Kong towards an age-
friendly city This report describes the baseline assessment work done in the Wan Chai
District as part of the project The objective of the baseline assessment was to
understand the needs of the Wan Chai District in preparing the district to become age
friendly The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey)
study and a qualitative (focus group) study A total of 502 participants were included in
the questionnaire survey from five sub-district communities of Causeway Bay Wan
Chai Happy Valley Canal Road and Tai Hang Five focus groups were conducted
The typical participant of the questionnaire survey was a married woman aged
over 65 years who has resided in the district for 30 years living alone or with spouse
in a private owned apartment using elderly centres with fair perceived health retired
with a monthly income of less than HK$6000 but still felt financially sufficient The
age of the building is usually over 30 years with elevator although residents would
still need to take the stairs to go out Majority of the participants expected themselves
to age in place in the coming 5 years however should their health deteriorate the
percentage with such expectation dropped considerably The participants perceived the
district to be age-friendly in general particularly in terms of social participation but
least in terms of housing The sense of community is strong particularly in terms of
sense of membership The older the participant the stronger the sense of community
and perceived age-friendliness The five sub-district communities differed in their
profile of perceived age-friendliness with similar overall sense of community
Focus group participants expressed a sense of pride and belonging of living in the
district They also identified areas for further improvement They drew attention to (1)
physical environment issues hygiene and crowdedness of the open public space
pavement obstruction and the challenges in and need for renovation and maintenance
of residential buildings (2) social and cultural environmental issues vanishing of small
shops that suits the need of older persons and (3) communication and services issues
the general availability of healthcare services albeit long waiting time
Results from this baseline assessment suggested existing groundwork with a
reasonably good sense of community and perceived age-friendliness in the district
Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly should build on the existing
infrastructure and network and make use of the diversity within the district Specific
recommendations were provided for each of the eight domains in the World Health
Organizationrsquos Age-friendly City framework
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 4
2 INTRODUCTION
21 Project Background
The rapid population ageing in Hong Kong means rapidly increasing needs of the older
population The population aged 65 years or above is projected to increase from the
current 14 of the total population to 25 or every 1 in 4 people by 2029 and to 32
or every 1 in 3 people by 20411 This presents a great challenge to the society in
multiple ways including a shrinking labour force with a working age to elderly
population ratio of 181 by 2041 and increasing burden and cost for public services
Building an age-friendly city will help meet the needs of older people enabling them
to live an active independent and good-quality life An age-friendly city would also
facilitate the development of Hong Kong as a better society
The Sau Po Centre on Ageing of The University of Hong Kong (HKU) received a
donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the Central and Western District and the Wan
Chai District In both districts the study is implemented in two phases from September
2015 to February 2016 (Phase 1) and phase 2 is 3 years since March 2016 Phase 1 of
the project consists of three parts The first part is a baseline assessment of district age-
friendliness using a questionnaire interview design The second part is baseline
assessment of district friendliness using a focus group design with district residents and
key stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of their views on age-friendliness in
their communities A report of district-based recommendations and implementation
proposals is generated based on these findings The third part is to organize an ldquoAge-
friendly City Ambassador Programmerdquo in the districts to train ambassadors in
becoming familiar with the knowledge and methods in building an age-friendly
community Second phase of the project consists of collaboration with key district
stakeholders and provision of professional support from the HKU team to develop
implement and evaluate district-based age-friendly city projects for enhancing district
age-friendliness
This report presents baseline assessment findings from Phase 1 The objective of
the baseline assessment was to understand the needs of the Central amp Western District
and the Wan Chai District in preparing to become age friendly
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5
22 District Characteristics
Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within
the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high
volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as
Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and
governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood
have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the
2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency
Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)
Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)
Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)
According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai
District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged
65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population
This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population
Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly
population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140
Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the
total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong
Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working
population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household
was HK$45200
Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District
Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100
Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995
Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000
Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500
Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000
The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent
housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district
are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized
home ownership housing is available in the district
Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has
a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4
private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6
23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District
In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern
for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and
governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-
friendliness of the district3
Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-
wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of
Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of
HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee
of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office
of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan
Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated
as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013
trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a
guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance
of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-
friendly city
Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015
年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5
was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for
the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City
Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly
ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the
concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express
their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community
services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly
community
Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader
or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in
age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai
District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly
Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the
Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7
3 METHODOLOGY
The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a
qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand
the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among
residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group
study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness
of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined
by the World Health Organization (WHO)
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai
District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or
individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study
Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities
(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and
characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the
district
Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District
Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas
Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park
Tin Hau
Causeway Bay
Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy
Oi Kwan
Southorn
Tai Fat Hau
Stubbs Road
Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout
Broadwood
Happy Valley
Canal Road (CR) Canal Road
Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang
Lai Tak Tsuen
The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources
including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and
advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8
312 Measures
The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-
administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the
following areas (Appendix 2)
(i) Sociodemographic Information
These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type
employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured
using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6
(ii) Community Care
These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools
and ageing-in-place expectations
(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness
Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed
based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and
Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along
eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing
social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and
employment communication and information and community support and health
services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains
(iv) Sense of Community
Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence
and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of
Community Scale78
313 Data Analysis
Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to
identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness
and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test
the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups
and sub-district communities using linear regression method
32 Focus Group
This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the
WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we
have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council
of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each
focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute
break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in
community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9
4 RESULTS
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental
housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong
Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay
(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR
60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table
41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above
and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults
aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic
helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their
spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among
them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older
persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund
for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having
a monthly personal income below HK$6000
Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities
Sub-district communities N
Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153
Victoria Park 3 06
Tin Hau 20 40
Causeway Bay 54 108
Wan Chai (WC) 194 386
Hennessy 66 131
Oi Kwan 53 106
Southorn 29 58
Tai Fat Hau 44 88
Stubbs Road 2 04
Happy Valley (HV) 45 90
Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06
Broadwood 8 16
Happy Valley 34 68
Canal Road (CR) 30 60
Tai Hang (TH) 156 311
Tai Hang 33 66
Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245
Total 502 1000
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 4
2 INTRODUCTION
21 Project Background
The rapid population ageing in Hong Kong means rapidly increasing needs of the older
population The population aged 65 years or above is projected to increase from the
current 14 of the total population to 25 or every 1 in 4 people by 2029 and to 32
or every 1 in 3 people by 20411 This presents a great challenge to the society in
multiple ways including a shrinking labour force with a working age to elderly
population ratio of 181 by 2041 and increasing burden and cost for public services
Building an age-friendly city will help meet the needs of older people enabling them
to live an active independent and good-quality life An age-friendly city would also
facilitate the development of Hong Kong as a better society
The Sau Po Centre on Ageing of The University of Hong Kong (HKU) received a
donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the Central and Western District and the Wan
Chai District In both districts the study is implemented in two phases from September
2015 to February 2016 (Phase 1) and phase 2 is 3 years since March 2016 Phase 1 of
the project consists of three parts The first part is a baseline assessment of district age-
friendliness using a questionnaire interview design The second part is baseline
assessment of district friendliness using a focus group design with district residents and
key stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of their views on age-friendliness in
their communities A report of district-based recommendations and implementation
proposals is generated based on these findings The third part is to organize an ldquoAge-
friendly City Ambassador Programmerdquo in the districts to train ambassadors in
becoming familiar with the knowledge and methods in building an age-friendly
community Second phase of the project consists of collaboration with key district
stakeholders and provision of professional support from the HKU team to develop
implement and evaluate district-based age-friendly city projects for enhancing district
age-friendliness
This report presents baseline assessment findings from Phase 1 The objective of
the baseline assessment was to understand the needs of the Central amp Western District
and the Wan Chai District in preparing to become age friendly
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5
22 District Characteristics
Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within
the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high
volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as
Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and
governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood
have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the
2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency
Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)
Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)
Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)
According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai
District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged
65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population
This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population
Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly
population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140
Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the
total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong
Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working
population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household
was HK$45200
Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District
Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100
Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995
Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000
Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500
Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000
The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent
housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district
are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized
home ownership housing is available in the district
Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has
a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4
private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6
23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District
In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern
for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and
governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-
friendliness of the district3
Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-
wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of
Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of
HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee
of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office
of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan
Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated
as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013
trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a
guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance
of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-
friendly city
Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015
年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5
was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for
the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City
Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly
ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the
concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express
their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community
services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly
community
Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader
or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in
age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai
District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly
Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the
Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7
3 METHODOLOGY
The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a
qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand
the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among
residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group
study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness
of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined
by the World Health Organization (WHO)
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai
District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or
individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study
Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities
(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and
characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the
district
Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District
Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas
Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park
Tin Hau
Causeway Bay
Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy
Oi Kwan
Southorn
Tai Fat Hau
Stubbs Road
Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout
Broadwood
Happy Valley
Canal Road (CR) Canal Road
Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang
Lai Tak Tsuen
The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources
including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and
advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8
312 Measures
The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-
administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the
following areas (Appendix 2)
(i) Sociodemographic Information
These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type
employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured
using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6
(ii) Community Care
These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools
and ageing-in-place expectations
(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness
Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed
based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and
Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along
eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing
social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and
employment communication and information and community support and health
services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains
(iv) Sense of Community
Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence
and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of
Community Scale78
313 Data Analysis
Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to
identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness
and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test
the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups
and sub-district communities using linear regression method
32 Focus Group
This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the
WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we
have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council
of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each
focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute
break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in
community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9
4 RESULTS
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental
housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong
Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay
(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR
60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table
41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above
and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults
aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic
helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their
spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among
them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older
persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund
for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having
a monthly personal income below HK$6000
Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities
Sub-district communities N
Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153
Victoria Park 3 06
Tin Hau 20 40
Causeway Bay 54 108
Wan Chai (WC) 194 386
Hennessy 66 131
Oi Kwan 53 106
Southorn 29 58
Tai Fat Hau 44 88
Stubbs Road 2 04
Happy Valley (HV) 45 90
Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06
Broadwood 8 16
Happy Valley 34 68
Canal Road (CR) 30 60
Tai Hang (TH) 156 311
Tai Hang 33 66
Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245
Total 502 1000
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5
22 District Characteristics
Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within
the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high
volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as
Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and
governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood
have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the
2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency
Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)
Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)
Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)
According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai
District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged
65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population
This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population
Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly
population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140
Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the
total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong
Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working
population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household
was HK$45200
Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District
Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100
Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995
Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000
Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500
Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000
The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent
housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district
are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized
home ownership housing is available in the district
Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has
a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4
private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6
23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District
In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern
for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and
governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-
friendliness of the district3
Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-
wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of
Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of
HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee
of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office
of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan
Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated
as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013
trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a
guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance
of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-
friendly city
Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015
年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5
was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for
the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City
Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly
ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the
concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express
their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community
services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly
community
Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader
or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in
age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai
District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly
Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the
Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7
3 METHODOLOGY
The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a
qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand
the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among
residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group
study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness
of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined
by the World Health Organization (WHO)
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai
District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or
individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study
Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities
(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and
characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the
district
Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District
Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas
Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park
Tin Hau
Causeway Bay
Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy
Oi Kwan
Southorn
Tai Fat Hau
Stubbs Road
Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout
Broadwood
Happy Valley
Canal Road (CR) Canal Road
Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang
Lai Tak Tsuen
The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources
including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and
advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8
312 Measures
The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-
administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the
following areas (Appendix 2)
(i) Sociodemographic Information
These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type
employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured
using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6
(ii) Community Care
These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools
and ageing-in-place expectations
(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness
Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed
based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and
Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along
eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing
social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and
employment communication and information and community support and health
services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains
(iv) Sense of Community
Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence
and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of
Community Scale78
313 Data Analysis
Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to
identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness
and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test
the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups
and sub-district communities using linear regression method
32 Focus Group
This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the
WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we
have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council
of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each
focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute
break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in
community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9
4 RESULTS
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental
housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong
Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay
(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR
60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table
41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above
and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults
aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic
helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their
spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among
them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older
persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund
for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having
a monthly personal income below HK$6000
Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities
Sub-district communities N
Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153
Victoria Park 3 06
Tin Hau 20 40
Causeway Bay 54 108
Wan Chai (WC) 194 386
Hennessy 66 131
Oi Kwan 53 106
Southorn 29 58
Tai Fat Hau 44 88
Stubbs Road 2 04
Happy Valley (HV) 45 90
Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06
Broadwood 8 16
Happy Valley 34 68
Canal Road (CR) 30 60
Tai Hang (TH) 156 311
Tai Hang 33 66
Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245
Total 502 1000
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6
23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District
In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern
for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and
governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-
friendliness of the district3
Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-
wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of
Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of
HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee
of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office
of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan
Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated
as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013
trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a
guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance
of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-
friendly city
Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015
年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5
was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for
the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City
Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly
ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the
concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express
their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community
services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly
community
Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader
or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in
age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai
District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly
Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the
Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7
3 METHODOLOGY
The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a
qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand
the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among
residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group
study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness
of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined
by the World Health Organization (WHO)
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai
District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or
individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study
Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities
(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and
characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the
district
Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District
Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas
Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park
Tin Hau
Causeway Bay
Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy
Oi Kwan
Southorn
Tai Fat Hau
Stubbs Road
Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout
Broadwood
Happy Valley
Canal Road (CR) Canal Road
Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang
Lai Tak Tsuen
The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources
including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and
advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8
312 Measures
The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-
administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the
following areas (Appendix 2)
(i) Sociodemographic Information
These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type
employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured
using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6
(ii) Community Care
These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools
and ageing-in-place expectations
(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness
Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed
based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and
Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along
eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing
social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and
employment communication and information and community support and health
services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains
(iv) Sense of Community
Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence
and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of
Community Scale78
313 Data Analysis
Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to
identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness
and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test
the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups
and sub-district communities using linear regression method
32 Focus Group
This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the
WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we
have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council
of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each
focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute
break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in
community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9
4 RESULTS
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental
housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong
Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay
(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR
60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table
41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above
and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults
aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic
helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their
spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among
them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older
persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund
for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having
a monthly personal income below HK$6000
Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities
Sub-district communities N
Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153
Victoria Park 3 06
Tin Hau 20 40
Causeway Bay 54 108
Wan Chai (WC) 194 386
Hennessy 66 131
Oi Kwan 53 106
Southorn 29 58
Tai Fat Hau 44 88
Stubbs Road 2 04
Happy Valley (HV) 45 90
Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06
Broadwood 8 16
Happy Valley 34 68
Canal Road (CR) 30 60
Tai Hang (TH) 156 311
Tai Hang 33 66
Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245
Total 502 1000
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7
3 METHODOLOGY
The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a
qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand
the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among
residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group
study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness
of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined
by the World Health Organization (WHO)
31 Questionnaire Survey
311 Participants
Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai
District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or
individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study
Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities
(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and
characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the
district
Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District
Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas
Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park
Tin Hau
Causeway Bay
Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy
Oi Kwan
Southorn
Tai Fat Hau
Stubbs Road
Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout
Broadwood
Happy Valley
Canal Road (CR) Canal Road
Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang
Lai Tak Tsuen
The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources
including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and
advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8
312 Measures
The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-
administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the
following areas (Appendix 2)
(i) Sociodemographic Information
These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type
employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured
using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6
(ii) Community Care
These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools
and ageing-in-place expectations
(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness
Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed
based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and
Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along
eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing
social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and
employment communication and information and community support and health
services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains
(iv) Sense of Community
Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence
and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of
Community Scale78
313 Data Analysis
Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to
identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness
and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test
the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups
and sub-district communities using linear regression method
32 Focus Group
This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the
WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we
have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council
of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each
focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute
break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in
community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9
4 RESULTS
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental
housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong
Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay
(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR
60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table
41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above
and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults
aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic
helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their
spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among
them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older
persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund
for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having
a monthly personal income below HK$6000
Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities
Sub-district communities N
Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153
Victoria Park 3 06
Tin Hau 20 40
Causeway Bay 54 108
Wan Chai (WC) 194 386
Hennessy 66 131
Oi Kwan 53 106
Southorn 29 58
Tai Fat Hau 44 88
Stubbs Road 2 04
Happy Valley (HV) 45 90
Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06
Broadwood 8 16
Happy Valley 34 68
Canal Road (CR) 30 60
Tai Hang (TH) 156 311
Tai Hang 33 66
Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245
Total 502 1000
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8
312 Measures
The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-
administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the
following areas (Appendix 2)
(i) Sociodemographic Information
These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type
employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured
using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6
(ii) Community Care
These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools
and ageing-in-place expectations
(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness
Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed
based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and
Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along
eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing
social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and
employment communication and information and community support and health
services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains
(iv) Sense of Community
Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence
and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of
Community Scale78
313 Data Analysis
Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to
identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness
and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test
the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups
and sub-district communities using linear regression method
32 Focus Group
This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the
WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we
have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council
of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each
focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute
break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in
community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9
4 RESULTS
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental
housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong
Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay
(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR
60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table
41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above
and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults
aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic
helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their
spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among
them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older
persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund
for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having
a monthly personal income below HK$6000
Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities
Sub-district communities N
Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153
Victoria Park 3 06
Tin Hau 20 40
Causeway Bay 54 108
Wan Chai (WC) 194 386
Hennessy 66 131
Oi Kwan 53 106
Southorn 29 58
Tai Fat Hau 44 88
Stubbs Road 2 04
Happy Valley (HV) 45 90
Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06
Broadwood 8 16
Happy Valley 34 68
Canal Road (CR) 30 60
Tai Hang (TH) 156 311
Tai Hang 33 66
Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245
Total 502 1000
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9
4 RESULTS
41 Questionnaire Survey
411 Participant Characteristics
A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental
housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong
Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders
(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay
(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR
60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table
41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above
and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults
aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic
helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their
spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among
them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older
persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund
for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having
a monthly personal income below HK$6000
Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities
Sub-district communities N
Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153
Victoria Park 3 06
Tin Hau 20 40
Causeway Bay 54 108
Wan Chai (WC) 194 386
Hennessy 66 131
Oi Kwan 53 106
Southorn 29 58
Tai Fat Hau 44 88
Stubbs Road 2 04
Happy Valley (HV) 45 90
Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06
Broadwood 8 16
Happy Valley 34 68
Canal Road (CR) 30 60
Tai Hang (TH) 156 311
Tai Hang 33 66
Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245
Total 502 1000
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10
Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Gender
Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282
Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718
Age group
18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109
50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109
65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500
ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282
Marital status
Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71
Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596
Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295
Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38
Education
Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186
Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333
Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321
Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32
Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128
Employment status
Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161
Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06
Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716
Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97
Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19
Living arrangement
Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231
With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263
Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250
With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205
With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51
Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77
Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205
For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207
For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379
For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724
Finance
Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32
Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199
Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647
More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109
Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13
Monthly personal income
No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52
HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658
HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135
HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97
HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32
HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19
geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06
daggerMultiple responses allowed
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11
Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The
average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority
(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building
aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of
floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these
buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the
participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out
Table 43 Residence characteristics
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145
Housing N ()
Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795
Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64
Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141
Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0
Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0
Age of building
10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26
11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19
21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78
31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877
Building environment
No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68
With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955
Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458
The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44
Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34
SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such
as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had
volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months
Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly
centres (745)
In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked
if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a
residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite
negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least
50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next
5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to
313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12
Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
Self-rated health
Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83
Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147
Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224
Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455
Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90
Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11
Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257
Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297
User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646
Cane walker or wheelchair
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
n n n n n n
If health remains the same
0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746
10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46
20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38
30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46
40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08
50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92
60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08
80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08
90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00
100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08
If health worsens
0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308
10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92
20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62
30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62
40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23
50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231
60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0
70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100
80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38
90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31
100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54
daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13
412 Perceived Age-friendliness
Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19
subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the
highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by
transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and
information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)
Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains
ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in
transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be
lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly
in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher
(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and
42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general
appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion
opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to
rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community
support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo
and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)
while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher
level of age friendliness (41)
413 Sense of Community
Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of
community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to
304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership
was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)
and sense of influence in their community (68)
Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in
CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest
in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV
scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion
connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14
Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities
Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)
Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)
Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)
Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)
Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)
Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)
Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)
Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)
Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)
Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)
Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)
Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)
Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)
Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)
Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)
Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)
Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)
Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)
Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)
Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)
Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)
Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)
Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)
Community support amp health
services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)
Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)
Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)
Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15
Table 47 Sense of community
Total CWB WC HV CR TH
Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)
Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)
Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)
Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)
Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)
All reported numbers are mean (SD)
414 Age Group Comparison
Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on
perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district
communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness
each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the
eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group
predicted a 118-point increase
415 Sub-district Community Comparison
Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities
after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in
the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH
people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and
community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-
friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-
friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication
and information
Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants
living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility
of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and
accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo
Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability
of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for
social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-
friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo
HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of
housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo
CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains
ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16
transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo
ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and
ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo
All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB
WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence
and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH
Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019
Outdoor spaces 022
Buildings 016
Transportation 025
Road safety amp maintenance 028
Specialized services availability 022
Public transport comfort to use 026
Public transport accessibility 022
Housing 031
Affordability amp accessibility 026
Environment 038
Social participation 023
Facilities and settings 023
Social activities 023
Respect amp Social Inclusion 027
Attitude 029
Social inclusion opportunities 024
Civic participation amp employment 024
Civic participation 027
Employment 022
Communication amp information 016
Information 017
Communication amp digital devices 019
Community support amp health services 013
Medicalsocial services 018
Emergency support 004
Burial service 004
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 005
Membership 040
Influence 029
Emotional connection 040
Total score 118
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17
Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis
Coefficientdagger
CWB WC HV CR
Perceived Age-friendliness
Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027
Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012
Buildings 032 047 020 071
Transportation 018 026 003 060
Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010
Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059
Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034
Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093
Housing -016 -019 -035 -037
Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045
Environment 002 -002 006 -027
Social participation 001 015 -004 028
Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029
Social activities -0002 014 -019 034
Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018
Attitude -016 -001 -018 026
Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013
Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052
Civic participation -0002 015 006 062
Employment 008 007 -008 046
Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034
Information 0002 005 -039 038
Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044
Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032
Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046
Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011
Burial service 055 040 002 033
Sense of Community
Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039
Membership -022 -019 -029 002
Influence -017 -006 -080 015
Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022
Total score -017 023 -109 079
daggerTH as the reference group
Significance levels at plt005 and plt001
Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18
42 Focus Group Study
421 Participant Characteristics
Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness
of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5
(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10
(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and
have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic
characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410
Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants
Characteristics N
Gender
Male 2 57
Female 33 943
Age group
18-49 years 0 0
50-64 years 6 171
65-79 years 14 400
80 years 15 429
Education
Nil pre-primary 6 176
Primary 15 441
Secondary (F1-5) 9 265
Secondary (F6-7) 0 0
Post-secondary 4 114
Housing
Public rental 10 286
Private rental 3 86
Private owned 22 629
Residence years (mean SD) 374 184
Living arrangement
Living alone 10 286
With spouse only 6 171
Spouse and other family members 5 143
With children grandchildren 14 400
With other family members 0 0
Monthly personal income
No income 3 88
HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706
HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147
HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29
HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29
HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0
geHK$60000 0 0
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19
Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight
WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three
areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)
communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of
pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to
identify areas for further improvement
422 Physical Environment
WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings
(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that
affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet
excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and
Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road
and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road
(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was
reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay
for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to
other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused
injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were
reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas
cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns
(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made
a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was
regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there
are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness
equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug
addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The
Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness
equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters
or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection
from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less
accessible by public transport
WHO Domain 2 Transportation
(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and
convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was
described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however
public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older
people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait
Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The
relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant
taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies
(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20
over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it
inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near
the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported
to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for
pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those
who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including
some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for
both pedestrians and drivers
(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were
reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with
insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for
stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate
traffic regulations
(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas
with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too
small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several
tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these
were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram
(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending
on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in
the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops
However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for
elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a
safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping
bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the
newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem
However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to
push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low
for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries
Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The
tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However
some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have
difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to
HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent
coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and
considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR
to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East
which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced
or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects
Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where
Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for
older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in
some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21
in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the
advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and
being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage
WHO Domain 3 Housing
(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are
privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which
were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial
burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among
owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants
sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some
buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have
difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that
this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the
time-to-repair was usually very long
(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that
specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are
needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses
(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property
price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent
an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five
smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees
Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were
often not passed on to the renters
423 Social and Cultural Environment
WHO Domain 4 Social Participation
(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and
accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for
holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to
go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung
Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was
considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the
stairs and cramped seating
(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially
isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community
Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits
to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living
with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need
emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available
to them
(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and
CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22
Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the
frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen
to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation
opportunities
WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion
(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful
toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are
courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before
starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats
for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats
whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of
priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who
focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need
(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style
mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and
jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older
residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs
(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)
to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets
for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the
district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to
travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market
(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental
storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the
building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan
Market and Municipal Services Building
WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment
(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for
older people in the district very few participants commented on civic
participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the
availability of paid job opportunities for older people
424 Communication Community and Health Services
WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information
(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and
information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source
of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards
were also mentioned to be an important source of information
WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23
(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were
reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV
were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of
the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home
help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social
and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers
only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems
or seeking help from others
(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in
the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and
preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available
in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic
and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong
Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was
commended as a good governmental support for older people However some
participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a
healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the
importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation
so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the
events of accidents or acute conditions
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24
5 CONCLUSIONS
The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents
aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population
density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made
some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since
2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of
Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social
Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the
district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement
Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay
Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly
and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been
Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such
as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district
Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district
age friendly
Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social
participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)
but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in
accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and
settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social
participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic
participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the
district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the
community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)
in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five
communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social
participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness
these five districts showed variations
The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social
inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into
the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation
domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of
public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly
should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service
is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level
To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the
district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some
suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25
improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to
manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)
improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more
fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making
them more accessible by public transportation
To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can
focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as
providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)
improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai
Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on
pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law
enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving
or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for
bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving
particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting
theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and
improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage
To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on
increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by
focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining
tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the
needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices
to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults
To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district
can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for
holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older
people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public
transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its
geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation
To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the
district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours
on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and
revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service
building
To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district
can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus
group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people
would be an important area for improvement
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26
To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain
the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of
information
To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services
domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of
community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district
(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in
Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future
To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-
friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work
to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of
membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of
influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly
work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27
References
1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013
httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28
September 2013
2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District
Council District 2014
3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012
4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department
Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East
Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour
Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013
5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan
Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015
6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -
Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)
220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003
7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental
Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators
Research 2014117(2)421-436
8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale
Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community
Psychology 200836(1)61-73
9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014
10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015
httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015
11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016
httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen
sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML
12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016
httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens
ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML
13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf
Accessed 29 October 2015
14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016
httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf
Accessed 22 March 2016
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)
Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28
Appendix 1 District Map
Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey
Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
1
Appendix 1 District Map
Legend
The border of each cluster is
marked by a particular colour
---- Wan Chai (Blue)
---- Canal Road (Black)
---- Causeway Bay (Orange)
---- Tai Hang (Green)
---- Happy Valley (Yellow)
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
1
Appendix 2 Questionnaire
共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)
問卷調查
A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女
2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)
b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別
(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39
(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64
(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+
3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名
稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]
中西區 ndash 堅尼地城
(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍
ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤
(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街
ndash 半山
(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠
ndash 中環及上環
(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華
灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣
(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣
ndash 灣仔
(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道
ndash 跑馬地
(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地
ndash 鵝頸
(26)鵝頸
ndash 大坑
(27)大坑 (28)勵德
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
2
4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月
5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)
(1)從未結婚
(2)已婚
(3)喪偶
(4)離婚
(5)分
(6)其他(請註明)
6 已完成的最高教育程度
(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)
(2)小學
(3)初中(中一至中三)
(4)高中(中四至中五)
(5)預科(中六至中七)
(6)專上教育文憑證書課程
(7)專上教育副學位課程
(8)專上教育學位課程或以上
7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方
(A) 你是否在公屋居住
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)
(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)
(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)
(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位
(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇
(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
3
8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)
(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨
b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的
(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))
(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))
8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款
(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)
(1)有
8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)已結束 (2)未結束
8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍
(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房
(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房
8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是
(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)
(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)
8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍
(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是
8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)
(1)教職員住所
(2)其他 (請註明)
c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈
(0)否
(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)
8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈
(請註明)
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
4
9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇
I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年
(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年
(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上
II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層
III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有
IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎
(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要
V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯
(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級
(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上
10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)
(1)獨居 (6)父母
(2)配偶 (7)祖父母
(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹
(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________
(5)孫
b) 有傭人與您同住嗎
(1)沒有 (2)有
11 您現時有無返工
(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項
(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)
(2)專業人員(請註明)
(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)
(4)文書支援人員(請註明)
(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)
(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)
(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)
(8)非技術工人(請註明)
(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)
(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)
(1)失業人士
(2)退休人士
(3)料理家務者
(4)學生
(5)其他(請註明)
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
5
12 a) 你是否一個照顧者
(0)否 (1)是
b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)
(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上
13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)
過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動
(0)否 (1)有
14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支
(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘
(5)非常充裕
15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣
(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999
(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999
(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999
(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999
(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999
(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000
(7) 10000 - 14999
16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎
您本人 同住的家人
a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有
17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老
人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的
機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
6
B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表
1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為
同意6 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5 6
非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分
有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用
該設施環境的整體情況評分
您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
A
室外空間及建築 非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 公共地方乾淨同舒適
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 單車徑同行人路分開
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方
便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降
機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得
妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
7
B
交通
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 路面交通有秩序
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋
服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡
劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都
係可靠同埋班次頻密
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘
人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫
又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有
清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上
落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮
貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6
12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
8
C
住所
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他
社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自
由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長
者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦
有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境
1 2 3 4 5 6
D
社會參與
1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅
收費 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通
選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中
心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動
1 2 3 4 5 6
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
9
E
尊重及社會包融
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會
俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的
1 2 3 4 5 6
F
社區參與及就業
1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導
同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會
1 2 3 4 5 6
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
10
G
訊息交流
非常不同意
不同意
有點不同意
有點同意
同意
非常同意
1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢
本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6
4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃
員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點
樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣
泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊
1 2 3 4 5 6
H
社區支持與健康服務
1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠
1 2 3 4 5 6
2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務
1 2 3 4 5 6
3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方
1 2 3 4 5 6
4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服
務 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制
1 2 3 4 5 6
6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援
服務 1 2 3 4 5 6
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
11
10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福
(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半
(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福
60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份
C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)
以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不
同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意
請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip
社群意識指數
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
普
通
同
意
非
常
同
意
1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5
2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5
3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5
4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5
5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5
6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5
7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5
8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5
9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
12
D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)
以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情
況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選
擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號
例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在
ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號
例題老年人在社會上是個負擔
非
常
不
同
意
不
同
意
少
少
不
同
意
少
少
同
意
同
意
非
常
同
意
非
常
不
同
意
(1)
不
同
意
(2)
少
少
不
同
意
(3)
少
少
同
意
(4)
同
意
(5)
非
常
同
意
(6)
1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍
2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣
3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服
4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很
反感
5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善
6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼
7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事
8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的
9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢
10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛
59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
13
E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)
(請在選擇的格內填 )
以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問
從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵
達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的
編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請
填入具體名稱]
是(1) 否(0)
1 便利店或者報刊亭
2 教堂或者其他宗教場所
3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)
4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心
家庭服務中心
5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)
6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)
7 藥房
8 酒樓
9 茶餐廳或者快餐店
10 雜貨店
11 街市超級市場
12 圖書館
13 銀行
14 郵局
15 子女的家 不適用
16 朋友的家 不適用
17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處
勞工署職業輔導課等)
18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)
19 理髮店
20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)
2) 3)
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
14
F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )
1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少
次
回答下列問題時請
只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動
只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)
注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度
平均頻率
(每週次數)
平均持續時間
(分鐘)
a 劇烈運動
(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)
次數週 分鐘
b 中等強度運動
(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)
次數週 分鐘
c 輕度運動
(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)
次數週 分鐘
d 阻力運動
(增強肌力)
(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重
機或阻力帶仰臥起坐
深蹲)
次數週 分鐘
2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排
汗心跳加速)嗎
(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少
3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活
(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半
(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
15
G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )
說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺
和日常生活的情況
如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案
1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是
(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好
(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差
以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這
些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何
2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球
或打太極拳
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
3) 上幾層樓梯
(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制
以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而
遇到下列的問題
4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制
(1)會 (2)不會
在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例
如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題
6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少
(1)會 (2)不會
7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了
(1)會 (2)不會
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
16
8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)
有多大影響
(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響
(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響
以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一
個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案
9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的
社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)
(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間
(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有
問卷完成日期
( 日 月 年 )
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
1
Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide
Sau Po Centre on Ageing
The University of Hong Kong
香港大學秀圃老年研究中心
「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)
聚焦小組
小組簡介
『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極
老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都
有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各
方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市
更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動
香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是
次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標
來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況
是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及
有關長者的意見
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
2
Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論
世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組
成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反
映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶
外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公
民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務
『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標
1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令
人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在
家安老的可能性
2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和
適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活
動至關重要
3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能
否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的
生活品質有很大的影響
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼
3
4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者
受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲
得生理和心理健康的有效保障
5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每
一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同
的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭
6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發
揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力
市場的形式來達致
7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而
要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的
透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的
資訊
8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與
生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為
此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少
Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的
情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼
Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼